Museum Audio Descriptions vs. General Audio Guides: Describing or Interpreting Cultural Heritage?

0Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The question of objectivity vs. subjectivity in audio description (AD) is still open and unresolved, even more so when considering less researched AD sub-genres, such as museum ADs. While sparse guidelines for describing artworks and cultural artefacts tend to favour neutrality, no clear consensus exists, and the limits of a factual style have already been highlighted (Hutchinson & Eardley, 2019). By crossing the borders of Translation Studies (TS) to gain insights from Museum Studies (MS), this paper claims that the ideal of achieving absolute objectivity is problematic and that a comparison between museum ADs and other tools for the visit would be a beneficial contribution to the objectivity vs. subjectivity debate. In light of current theories in MS, this study seeks to explore subjectivity in museum ADs (primarily addressed to visually impaired visitors) and general audio guides (AGs). Trailing previous research into subjectivity in museum ADs (Gallego, 2019), a text-focused analysis based on the appraisal theory (Martin & White, 2005) was conducted on a corpus of ADs and AGs to highlight discrepancies in terms of subjectivity between museum communicative practices aimed at different target audiences.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bartolini, C. (2023). Museum Audio Descriptions vs. General Audio Guides: Describing or Interpreting Cultural Heritage? Journal of Audiovisual Translation, 6(2), 77–98. https://doi.org/10.47476/jat.v6i2.2023.253

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free